Re: General Si5351 Question
I'd guess?Don is running with a faster i2c clock.
The Etherkit library supports lots of features we don't happen to need on the Bitx40.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 08:03 pm, W0PWE wrote:
Thanks for all the great suggestions. Looks like I have the Etherkit library version 2.01 so I updated to 2.10. This makes a noticeable improvement to around 2.5ms but I can't duplicate Don's results of 735us. I don't understand how our results could vary so widely. Could it be frequency dependent? I am switching back and forth between 7.030Mhz and 11.946Mhz.
So then I followed one of Jerry's (KE7ER) suggestions and modified my sketch to use his?si5351bx code. That was really easy to do and?si5351bx_setfreq()?took about 2ms to execute. Not bad - at 30WPM that is about 5% of the morse element length.?
Here is an ADDED BONUS.... I think Jerry wrote that code to save code space and wow did it ever. Using his code instead of the Si5351 library cut my code size from 22.4K (72%) down to 12.4K (40%). That is awesome! Thank you Jerry!! Even if I eventually decide to use two outputs for this I will stay with the si5351bx code for the code size reduction.
73, Jerry, W0PWE
|
Re: trouble installing raduino_v1.27
Paul,
It normally takes 5-10 seconds on my PC.
When the upload fails the editor tries for a really long time before timeout.
Check if you have the right board and port in the TOOLS menu. The correct port will be ticked. If you don't see one then you may need some driver.
Question arises: were you able to upload previous versions ?
Raj
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
At 08-11-2017, you wrote: Hi all, i am trying to upload the raduino_v1.27.ino to my raduino via the web Arduino Editor.
it just stays uploading with a message that says 'Executing command: exit status 1'. the raduino yellow LED light continues to flicker.
does it take a long time to upload the software?
thx,
Paul
|
Re: General Si5351 Question
Thanks for all the great suggestions. Looks like I have the Etherkit library version 2.01 so I updated to 2.10. This makes a noticeable improvement to around 2.5ms but I can't duplicate Don's results of 735us. I don't understand how our results could vary so widely. Could it be frequency dependent? I am switching back and forth between 7.030Mhz and 11.946Mhz.
So then I followed one of Jerry's (KE7ER) suggestions and modified my sketch to use his?si5351bx code. That was really easy to do and?si5351bx_setfreq()?took about 2ms to execute. Not bad - at 30WPM that is about 5% of the morse element length.?
Here is an ADDED BONUS.... I think Jerry wrote that code to save code space and wow did it ever. Using his code instead of the Si5351 library cut my code size from 22.4K (72%) down to 12.4K (40%). That is awesome! Thank you Jerry!! Even if I eventually decide to use two outputs for this I will stay with the si5351bx code for the code size reduction.
73, Jerry, W0PWE
|
The leaded cap goes across two pins of the tuning pot as explained in the wire-up instructions at hfsigs.com
Otherwise the operating frequency will jump around.
I don't think anybody at hfsigs has ever been able to say why they send out a 0.1uF SMT cap, and they've been asked.
Probably best put at the Raduino end of those same tuning pot wires.
The cap that goes into the low pass filter for suppressing the second harmonic should be 100pf, not supplied:
? ??http://bitxhacks.blogspot.com/2017/01/nd6ts-suppression-of-pesky-2nd-harmonic.html
? ??
Jerry, KE7ER
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 07:26 pm, John McFadden wrote:
I received and unpacked my bitx40 this evening, and included was a surface-mount capacitor inside a hand-cut segment of tape, which seems to match the packing list for "16. 1 x 0.1uf smd capacitor". There is also a non-SMT capacitor marked "104 AEC" (so also 0.1uf) but not included on the packing list.
I assume they're both for US spurious signal suppression and I can use whichever one is easier to solder onto the board, or am I missing something?
Thanks,
John
?
?
|
Thank you everybody for your help. Just ordered the proper pot from Adafruit - no RadioShacks left near me.
73 Ben KD2NOU
Ben,
A is audio taper - log pot. B is linear.
B will work but you may not like the way the volume changes when you
rotate it!
Raj
At 10-11-2017, you wrote:
If i remember correctly, the
¡°A?€ and the ¡°B?€ prefix designates if it is a linear taper or a
logarithmic taper.? You should be able to google which is which.
Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ
PJ2/K9HZ
On Nov 9, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Ben Piecora
<piecorab@...>
wrote:
Hello Everybody, just wondering
is the 10K pot that has the switch on it a regular, 10K pot or is it
special because it says "A10K" on it and all the pots I have in
the parts bin say "B10K" would that work or no? I was thinking
of putting a different pot with a different shaft on it and having a
seperate power switch.
--
Ben
KD2NOU
|
Ben,
A is audio taper - log pot. B is linear.
B will work but you may not like the way the volume changes when you
rotate it!
Raj
At 10-11-2017, you wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
If i remember correctly, the
?€?A?€? and the ?€?B?€? prefix designates if it is a linear taper or a
logarithmic taper.? You should be able to google which is which.
Dr. William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ
PJ2/K9HZ
?Snip.......
On Nov 9, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Ben Piecora
<piecorab@...>
wrote:
Hello Everybody, just wondering
is the 10K pot that has the switch on it a regular, 10K pot or is it
special because it says "A10K" on it and all the pots I have in
the parts bin say "B10K" would that work or no? I was thinking
of putting a different pot with a different shaft on it and having a
seperate power switch.
--
Ben
KD2NOU
|
I received and unpacked my bitx40 this evening, and included was a surface-mount capacitor inside a hand-cut segment of tape, which seems to match the packing list for "16. 1 x 0.1uf smd capacitor". There is also a non-SMT capacitor marked "104 AEC" (so also 0.1uf) but not included on the packing list.
I assume they're both for US spurious signal suppression and I can use whichever one is easier to solder onto the board, or am I missing something?
Thanks,
John
|
I have done some more tests with a spectrum analyser, and measured the following levels with a 470pf cap across L7 in the LPF, and a 470pf cap from the left side of L1 to the right side of L3 in the BPF.
See the attached pic, I have used 2 relays, one for the LPF, and one for the BPF.
3.660 +35dbm (5w)
7.320 +10dbm (10mw)
10.980 +10dbm (10mw)
14.640 +2dbm (1.5mw)
18.300 -2dbm
21.960 -7dbm
and so on.
Without the cap mod on the LPF I was getting +27dbm out on 40 metres when transmitting on 80!
I agree it is not optimal, but it is a lot better than trying to use the unmodified 40m LPF.
|
If i remember correctly, the ¡°A¡± and the ¡°B¡± prefix designates if it is a linear taper or a logarithmic taper. ?You should be able to google which is which.?
Dr.?William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ ? Owner - Operator Big Signal Ranch ¨C K9ZC Staunton, Illinois ? Owner ¨C Operator Villa Grand Piton - J68HZ Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I. Rent it:
email:??bill@... ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 9, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Ben Piecora < piecorab@...> wrote: Hello Everybody, just wondering is the 10K pot that has the switch on it a regular, 10K pot or is it special because it says "A10K" on it and all the pots I have in the parts bin say "B10K" would that work or no? I was thinking of putting a different pot with a different shaft on it and having a seperate power switch.
--
|
Hello Everybody, just wondering is the 10K pot that has the switch on it a regular, 10K pot or is it special because it says "A10K" on it and all the pots I have in the parts bin say "B10K" would that work or no? I was thinking of putting a different pot with a different shaft on it and having a seperate power switch.
--
|
BITX QSO Night, Sunday, November 12, 7pm Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere
BITX QSO Night, Sunday, November 12, 7pm Local Time, 7277 kHz in North America, 7177 kHz elsewhere
Join us as we make contacts from BITX40 to BITX40 on 7.277 MHz in 40 meters!
This is a worldwide event for BITX40 stations starting at 7pm in each time zone. To participate, call CQ BITX on Sunday, starting at 7pm your local time. The BITX QSO Night continues through the evening and conditions usually improve after sunset, so it is worthwhile to participate later in the evening.
Suggested Best Operating Practices:
Work at QRP power levels unless conditions require more power.
Call and listen for CQ BITX on the hour and every quarter hour.
It is helpful if you call CQ BITX with your callsign, name and location.?
Repeat your callsign a number of times during your CQ BITX and during QSO's.
Start a QSO by confirming the callsign, location, name and signal report of the other operator.
Say the callsign, name and location of the other operator so others can hear.
If the frequency is busy, avoid long conversations.
After your initial QSO is complete, ask if there are any other stations who would like to contact.
Report your QSO's, discuss propagation, noise, signal reports, audio reports, antenna type, etc. in this thread.
This is an undirected, scheduled event.? The BITX QSO Night relies on you to call CQ BITX to initiate contacts with other stations, so warm up that final and transmit a few calls on Sunday evening.? Talk to you then!
--
John - WA2FZW
|
Re: raduino v1.27 released (improved suppression of spurious burst)
I'm still new to all of this and don't know the history, but it seems like a separation of "core" and "bells-and-whistles" would be nice. Perhaps some kind of modular design that makes it easy for someone to come along with their OLED display and easily integrate it.
|
Re: raduino v1.27 released (improved suppression of spurious burst)
There already is a 2nd platform: Jack¡¯s Arduino Mega 2560 Mini based board. It does use an AD9850 instead of the Si5351, so using it as BFO would not be an option. But maybe the two platforms can cross-pollinate each other and we get something better on both sides.?
|
Re: Advanced Speech Processing Options
I have PCBs based on a Maxim part.? Works real great on the Oscope.? Have not tried it yet on BitX.
It puts out a constant value with 1-100 mv input sin wave.?? I have put a pot for output level.? Attached is the schematic.
The board is tiny, the width of the mic supplied with BitX.
I have a whole Microphone built with PTT switch.? All the parts are 3D printed.? I even got a board that would go in Bitx that senses Mic Current and
activates a fet to pull it the relay.? Thus you can get away with just a 3 wire cable to the mic, a standard 3.5 mm cable molded with male plug.
For a buck at the 99 Cent store I got a double male 6' cable. Cut in half it will make 2 microphones.
I will take pictures of everything and post them.
I think I have lots of spare PCBs.?? Several on this group have got them, no one has reported any results.
The Max part IS TINY, and data sheet requests a Ground pad inside the Pins pattern.? I used a heat gun and pasted, so far 2 of 2 worked.
Mike, WA6ISP
--
Mike Hagen, WA6ISP
10917 Bryant Street
Yucaipa, Ca. 92399
(909) 918-0058
PayPal ID "MotDog@..."
Mike@...
|
Re: raduino v1.27 released (improved suppression of spurious burst)
I actually like the idea of two separate platform paths. ?Ot keeps competition between the two alive but allows porting of code ideas from one path to another. ? It also gives new people a choice of directions to pursue and gives a better range of options. ? Plus more programmers are engaged specific to their platforms. ?And it could be that the cross over and there are both in one box!
Dr.?William J. Schmidt - K9HZ J68HZ 8P6HK ZF2HZ PJ4/K9HZ VP5/K9HZ PJ2/K9HZ ? Owner - Operator Big Signal Ranch ¨C K9ZC Staunton, Illinois ? Owner ¨C Operator Villa Grand Piton - J68HZ Soufriere, St. Lucia W.I. Rent it:
email:??bill@... ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 9, 2017, at 1:11 PM, Mike Woods < mhwoods@...> wrote: Thanks for all the suggestions around expanding the number of ports and processor capacity.I already have a port expander (8 bit) in one of my BITX, but this is not going to solve the problem of SRAM and program space.? It really only exacerbates the problem!There are lot of different views, as anticipated, around alternative processors. Some would prefer to stay with Arduino compatibility, others are happy to move to another platform (Teensy or Raspberry Pi, etc). There are advantages and disadvantages of each option.? To my mind a particular disadvantage of moving to the Pi is that this requires some familiarity with Linux and the addition of monitor, keyboard and mouse (unless you use remote control type software and control the pi from a laptop as suggested by Doug KD9CYF). However, I agree it is an attractive option for other reasons (e.g. remote radio control).This got me thinking about the principles involved with modding the BITX40.? I agree with Allard's approach to date in retaining backwards compatibility.To my mind this means retaining the existing Raduino intact and the mods that Allard's software supports. There is a way to have the best of both worlds:? backwards compatibility and the option to add an additional processor. The answer may lie in using the existing communication channel for other devices (I2C is already used to control the Si5351). However, it can also be used to communicate between two processors.? e.g. See for a simple example.Another Aduino Nano or a Mega Mini costs no more than a port expander, and has more ports!? This appeals to me as it also increases processing capability.The existing sketch could be modified to transfer out key data relating to hardware controls (PTT Sense, CW key down, etc.) whenever another slave processor was detected, and allow the slave to disable some functions (to my mind I would be particularly interested in disabling control of the Si5351 and the potentiometer on the Master).? It would also need to allow the passing in of data from the slave processor for display of information on the screen, and accept changes to parameters that are tied to board control (e.g. CW mode parameters).This would provide an open platform then for whatever processor people wanted to add to their Raduino/Bitx.What do you all think??? I would be particularly interested in Allard's thoughts on this, as he "owns" the current software that most of us are using.? I would be reluctant to fork it when it is still being actively developed!73 de Mike ZL1AXGOn 8/11/17 11:34 AM, David wrote:What about using a multiplexer chip to reduce the number of I/O lines needed. A bit old school but effective.
Sent from my iPhone
-- Mike Woodsmhwoods@...
|
Re: raduino v1.27 released (improved suppression of spurious burst)
Thanks for all the suggestions around expanding the number of ports and processor capacity.
I already have a port expander (8 bit) in one of my BITX, but this is not going to solve the problem of SRAM and program space.? It really only exacerbates the problem!
There are lot of different views, as anticipated, around alternative processors. Some would prefer to stay with Arduino compatibility, others are happy to move to another platform (Teensy or Raspberry Pi, etc). There are advantages and disadvantages of each option.? To my mind a particular disadvantage of moving to the Pi is that this requires some familiarity with Linux and the addition of monitor, keyboard and mouse (unless you use remote control type software and control the pi from a laptop as suggested by Doug KD9CYF). However, I agree it is an attractive option for other reasons (e.g. remote radio control).
This got me thinking about the principles involved with modding the BITX40.? I agree with Allard's approach to date in retaining backwards compatibility.
To my mind this means retaining the existing Raduino intact and the mods that Allard's software supports. There is a way to have the best of both worlds:? backwards compatibility and the option to add an additional processor. The answer may lie in using the existing communication channel for other devices (I2C is already used to control the Si5351). However, it can also be used to communicate between two processors.? e.g. See for a simple example.
Another Aduino Nano or a Mega Mini costs no more than a port expander, and has more ports!? This appeals to me as it also increases processing capability.
The existing sketch could be modified to transfer out key data relating to hardware controls (PTT Sense, CW key down, etc.) whenever another slave processor was detected, and allow the slave to disable some functions (to my mind I would be particularly interested in disabling control of the Si5351 and the potentiometer on the Master).? It would also need to allow the passing in of data from the slave processor for display of information on the screen, and accept changes to parameters that are tied to board control (e.g. CW mode parameters).
This would provide an open platform then for whatever processor people wanted to add to their Raduino/Bitx.
What do you all think??? I would be particularly interested in Allard's thoughts on this, as he "owns" the current software that most of us are using.? I would be reluctant to fork it when it is still being actively developed!
73 de Mike ZL1AXG
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 8/11/17 11:34 AM, David wrote: What about using a multiplexer chip to reduce the number of I/O lines needed. A bit old school but effective.
Sent from my iPhone
--
Mike Woods
mhwoods@...
|
Re: Advanced Speech Processing Options
Yeah, there are solder holes for replacing R1 and R2 with pots!
|
Re: Advanced Speech Processing Options
This module could potentially be used,
by removing R1 and substituting a potentiometer:
On 10/11/17 11:33 AM, Arvo KD9HLC via Groups.Io wrote:
Both are cool!? I'd probably want to put some knobs on the BitX
Box to twirl.
Radiomanjwt, do you have pix or schematic?? Where do you get
the 3V?? It's own regulator?
I always wanted one of these for my home music studio:
And my good mics are on permanent loan to my son-in-law...
|
Re: Advanced Speech Processing Options
Both are cool!? I'd probably want to put some knobs on the BitX Box to twirl.
Radiomanjwt, do you have pix or schematic?? Where do you get the 3V?? It's own regulator?
I always wanted one of these for my home music studio:
And my good mics are on permanent loan to my son-in-law...
|
Re: Advanced Speech Processing Options
Would something like this work??https://www.adafruit.com/product/1713
|
Raj vu2zap
radiomanjwt
K9HZ
Arvo W0VRA